Benchmark Results: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim And StarCraft II
The Elders Scroll V: Skyrim
Although clearly CPU-limited, both gaming systems sail through Skyrim’s High quality preset. The current machine leads by 15-18 frames per second, on average, and around 10 frames per second when we look at the minimum. It only dips below 60 frames per second briefly at 1680x1050.
Using Ultra details and with 8x MSAA applied, June's PC still appears either CPU- or platform-limited throughout testing, since frame rates at 1920x1080 match those at 1280x720. Interestingly, though, the two stock systems serve up similar performance at our highest resolution. Gains achieved by graphics overclocking now point to the GeForce GTX 560 as the current system’s bottleneck.
Searching for a worst-case scenario within the walls of Markarth, we found that the Pentium processor from this quarter's configuration delivered more than 40 FPS consistently, while last quarter's box briefly dropped as low as 30 FPS in the same game area. It's also worth noting, though, that the newer system was tested under an updated game version and GeForce drivers, which could impact the outcome, too.
StarCraft II
This 60-second Fraps benchmark starts out taxing, but eases up as enemies are eliminated from the map. We stay consistent by running the same four resolutions, even if more conservative display settings do this game no justice.
Once again, we see a familiar frame rate drop as the aspect ratio gets wider, directing blame toward a CPU limitation. So, it’s no surprise that the Pentium maintains a significant lead at all resolutions.
The fixed multiplier ratio imposed upon these processors stymie our overclocking efforts, so the same bottleneck persists through our highest test settings.
Minimums frame rates of 46 proved that last quarter's PC was capable of serving up a solid StarCraft II experience. But the current rig’s 64+ FPS earns it my vote for tackling large-scale battles.
Related Stories :
- Silent, But Deadly: Build Your Own Gaming-Ready 0 dB PC
- Part 4: Building A Balanced Gaming PC
- Part 3: Building A Balanced Gaming PC
- Part 2: Building A Balanced Gaming PC
- Part 1: Building A Balanced Gaming PC
- Build It: Picking Parts For Your Kid's Entry-Level Gaming PC
- Origin PC Offering Premium Mobile Gaming Bundle
- In Pictures: Four Sub-$100 Cases For Your 2013 Gaming PC
- MSI Launches 27-inch All-In-One Gaming PC
- Genius Intros $150 Speaker System for PC Gaming
so, looks like 500$ (Euro in europe
) its enaugh to play any modern game that is trown on the market... ty consoles 
I think it would be interesting if next quarter for your Budget PC you try to bring the performance per watt as high as you can while still maintaining an enjoyable gaming experience. Something like a G620+HD7750/70 with a high efficiency PSU such as Rosewill CAPSTONE 450.
Ever since I read the 7950B/7970GE review on here/anand performance per watt for me has been a priority when selecting components.
On the contrary, for a 500$ build, energy consumption and heat should be least concerns. Tweaking, overclocking and extracting the last possible performance from your hardware are the primary concerns of a 500$ gaming build. Even after HEAVY overclocking, you wont get 50W over the stock settings.
On the contrary, for a 500$ build, energy consumption and heat should be least concerns. Tweaking, overclocking and extracting the last possible performance from your hardware are the primary concerns of a 500$ gaming build. Even after HEAVY overclocking, you wont get 50W over the stock settings.
One may presume that someone after a $500 build is on a budget and hence doesn't want higher power consumption from overclocking.
Well, considering that I already have 3570K with GTX570, I'll be interested only in either $2000 PC or a graphic card from a $1000 PC.
At least I can take less heat for recommending b75 mobo...
On the contrary, for a 500$ build, energy consumption and heat should be least concerns. Tweaking, overclocking and extracting the last possible performance from your hardware are the primary concerns of a 500$ gaming build. Even after HEAVY overclocking, you wont get 50W over the stock settings.
According to the performance summary and efficiency page of this article Overclocking the GPU had a 13%(average according to this article) increase in power consumption for an extra 2% (average) performance. That seems like the opposite thing I'm talking about.
Overclocking is good for performance per dollar, not performance per watt.
@Paul Henningsen,
Why not substitute some existing parts for either an I3-2100 and/or an eVGA 560 Superclocked?
Nice, looking forward to the next builds. Some times OC does yield its advantages, those few frames can help and have helped me in games running smoothly or just over 30FPS. I honestly don't see why people are concerned with power, PC's don't cost much to run even overclocked. Unless your poor or working at McDonald's, then i see no reason why power is an issue unless otherwise stated. This whole green thing is a pain in the ass. I'm power hungry sorry.
^ there are no existing parts. This is a new build
Now thats what i call an balanced build, good job .
Also i agree with itzsnypah, Tom hardware should make an article on PC build with maximum performance that you can squeeze out of lowest watt, some people started to care about those things, and being green to the environment is nothing to be ashamed of.
^
Then i have this Excellent VIA CPU+MB combo for you. Efficient as hell. Best bang for the Watt possible. Ever.
We need to enforce the "no celeron please" rule, terrible for that $500 PC.
We need to enforce the "no celeron please" rule, terrible for that $500 PC.
"Pentium"
Thanks for this article. This gives me more ideas on how to build a computer for my brother this coming Christmas. Although, by that time, I would love to see if it might be possible for a Trinity-based gaming system to be built for around $500 and how it performs against this build.
Stop using those f*cked up CPUs... why you keep using crappy pentiums???
Since half a year you see a CPU limitation and you keep putting pentiums. When someone make a mistake the next time fix it but you don't... I bet Intel pays alot no other eplonation here!
I bet that my good old Phenom 955 will blow away ANY pentium you've put so far in 500$ crappy pc.
PLEASE I beg you stop using this sh*t...
Stop using those f*cked up CPUs... why you keep using crappy pentiums???I bet that my good old Phenom 955 will blow away ANY pentium you've put so far in 500$ crappy pc.PLEASE I beg you stop using this sh*t... Since half a year you see a CPU limitation and you keep putting pentiums. When someone make a mistake the next time fix it but you don't... I bet Intel pays alot no other eplonation here!
http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 20-10.html
pretty damn close, the Phenom 955 is definitely more attractive for overclockers, but offer limited upgradablilty because of motherboards etc. Pentiums use the 1155 socket, and therefore are upgradable to a better 2nd gen or 3rd gen processor, which anything above the g860 kicks the shit out of the Phenom
Temperatures above Ambient chart, you have the current PC vs the current PC.
Well, there is "living in my parents basement and unemployed" budget. And there is "living on my own" budget. Clearly, mayankleoboy1, is the loving parent budget.
Not hating though, the Kardashians all do